News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Capital Punishment

Started by dgirl1986, October 22, 2013, 08:16:19 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Aupmanyav

Quote from: "Plu"All of them say the same thing.
Perhaps because all of them are written by people having same type of views.
"Brahma Satyam Jagan-mithya" (Brahman is the truth, the observed is an illusion)
"Sarve Khalu Idam Brahma" (All this here is Brahman)

Shiranu

QuoteThat money could pobably keep 2-3 homeless people clothed, fed and homed to a similar standard of living, given that they wouldn't need the same level of supervision etc. Yet we have many starving people who have endured great tragedy and suffering in their lives recieving little to no state spending while those who seek to tear the fabric of society into shreds leech from the very society they have attacked. This is clearly not an ideal solution.

What is, then? Killing them without trial to make sure they are without a doubt guilty? Because of that process, killing a death row inmate is more expensive than housing him for the rest of his life.

It's not the vengeance that is expensive, it's the making sure you are killing the right person that hurts your wallet book, and I very well like it that way. If you think killing people should be cheap you might want to recheck your priorities.

QuotePerhaps because all of them are written by people having same type of views.

That executing people is not economically sound because it costs more? Yeah, the evidence probably would make them think that way.

I guess all scientists agree on evolution as well because they all just think the same as well...
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Plu

Quote from: "Aupmanyav"
Quote from: "Plu"All of them say the same thing.
Perhaps because all of them are written by people having same type of views.

If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to bring it up. Just, as Shiranu says, make sure it's comparing a system where they actually make sure they have the right guy (or gal).
Lynch mobs might be cheaper than life in prison, but they're not exactly reliable.

Jason78

Winner of WitchSabrinas Best Advice Award 2012


We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real
tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. -Plato

Hydra009

#94
Quote from: "Aupmanyav"
Quote from: "Plu"All of them say the same thing.
Perhaps because all of them are written by people having same type of views.
No, it's actually factually true that the death penalty is more expensive than life imprisonment, at least in the US.  This is because of the costs involved in capital punishment trial (which is more expensive than non-capital punishment trials) and the lengthy appeals process.

Like Plu said, look it up.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_pu ... tates#Cost

aileron

Quote from: "Hydra009"No, it's actually factually true that life imprisonment is more expensive than the death penalty, at least in the US.

You have this backwards, but the data isn't all that clear for all states.

This quote sums up why executions often cost more than life in prison:

"What we are paying for at such great cost is essentially our own ambivalence about capital punishment. We try to maintain the apparatus of state killing and another apparatus that almost guarantees that it won't happen. The public pays for both sides." -Frank Zimring.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! -- President Merkin Muffley

My mom was a religious fundamentalist. Plus, she didn't have a mouth. It's an unusual combination. -- Bender Bending Rodriguez

Hydra009

Quote from: "aileron"
Quote from: "Hydra009"No, it's actually factually true that life imprisonment is more expensive than the death penalty, at least in the US.

You have this backwards, but the data isn't all that clear for all states.
Yeah, I noticed the mistake shortly after and edited it.

SilentFutility

Quote from: "Hydra009"
Quote from: "Aupmanyav"
Quote from: "Plu"All of them say the same thing.
Perhaps because all of them are written by people having same type of views.
No, it's actually factually true that the death penalty is more expensive than life imprisonment, at least in the US.  This is because of the costs involved in capital punishment trial (which is more expensive than non-capital punishment trials) and the lengthy appeals process.

Like Plu said, look it up.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_pu ... tates#Cost

Yes but keeping someone in inhumane and degrading conditions for decades on death row is an extremely bad system, and as I understand it the number of people who are actually executed vs. the number who are kept like this until they die is very small.
I would hardly say the US prison system is good by any metric really. Because one, awfully carried-out way of doing something isn't working properly doesn't mean it cannot work.

Also, that article compares the costs of the trials. It doesn't seem to compare the costs of life imprisonment to execution directly, and another thing to note is that keeping someone on death row for decades is imprisoning them.

Quote
Quote from: "Shiranu"
QuoteThat money could pobably keep 2-3 homeless people clothed, fed and homed to a similar standard of living, given that they wouldn't need the same level of supervision etc. Yet we have many starving people who have endured great tragedy and suffering in their lives recieving little to no state spending while those who seek to tear the fabric of society into shreds leech from the very society they have attacked. This is clearly not an ideal solution.

What is, then? Killing them without trial to make sure they are without a doubt guilty? Because of that process, killing a death row inmate is more expensive than housing him for the rest of his life.

It's not the vengeance that is expensive, it's the making sure you are killing the right person that hurts your wallet book, and I very well like it that way. If you think killing people should be cheap you might want to recheck your priorities.
"Capital punishment provides a cost benefit in some cases" =/= "killing everyone is cheap".

What of the cases that are extremely clear-cut? Those where the perpetrator has admitted guilt? Those who have committed huge mass murders or cut people down in broad daylight in front of dozens of onlookers, on camera?

Is it expensive to figure out who the perpetrator of those crimes is?

Also, if you think someone has killed someone but you are not 100% sure, you STILL have a massively expensive trial even if the potential punishment is a lengthy custodial sentence, you don't just go "hmm this is a tricky case let's not spend any money on a trial and let him walk free", do you?

Of course accusing me of thinking "killing should be cheap" and having messed up priorities is also very constructive... not that I actually even vaguely hinted at that or anything. I love how pointing out that the state probably spends far more per murderer than it does per homeless person or other vulnerable person, or victims of violent crimes etc. and that maybe this is an issue that needs addressing ellicits this response rather than an explanation of why it isn't an issue or what a better solution would be.

Hydra009

Quote from: "SilentFutility"Yes but keeping someone in inhumane and degrading conditions for decades on death row is an extremely bad system, and as I understand it the number of people who are actually executed vs. the number who are kept like this until they die is very small.
Correct.

QuoteI would hardly say the US prison system is good by any metric really. Because one, awfully carried-out way of doing something isn't working properly doesn't mean it cannot work.
Of course it isn't good.  That's something just about everyone agrees on.  We're on-again-off-again with the death penalty.  And it's applied very unevenly, with some states (namely Texas) executing people like crazy and other states rarely or never executing people.



And it's even more unbalanced in the rest of the world:



(explanation:  country sizes are distorted based on number of executions - skinny countries rarely/never execute, fat countries often execute)

QuoteAlso, that article compares the costs of the trials. It doesn't seem to compare the costs of life imprisonment to execution directly, and another thing to note is that keeping someone on death row for decades is imprisoning them.
Well, yeah.  But the appeals process is part of the cost of applying the death penalty so naturally, that's going to be included (as is imprisonment during the appeals process).  I suppose you could fudge the numbers by comparing only the cost of the execution to the cost of life imprisonment, but would that paint an accurate picture?

QuoteWhat of the cases that are extremely clear-cut? Those where the perpetrator has admitted guilt? Those who have committed huge mass murders or cut people down in broad daylight in front of dozens of onlookers, on camera?

Is it expensive to figure out who the perpetrator of those crimes is?
And what of them?  What should the procedure be in such cases?  How does one differentiate "clear-cut" cases from cases that aren't so clear cut?

Plu

QuoteWhat of the cases that are extremely clear-cut? Those where the perpetrator has admitted guilt? Those who have committed huge mass murders or cut people down in broad daylight in front of dozens of onlookers, on camera?

In the rare cases where these people are taken alive, they are valuable research subjects and should be treated as such.

Shiranu

QuoteWhat of the cases that are extremely clear-cut? Those where the perpetrator has admitted guilt? Those who have committed huge mass murders or cut people down in broad daylight in front of dozens of onlookers, on camera?

I don't think admission of guilt should qualify, no.

As for people who have done mass murderers, such as Hitler, Stalin or whatnot, then I think an argument can be made. That is an extremely rare occurrence though, and mass murderers generally exist outside or above the law.

Eye witness accounts are not held with much weight in court, so I don't think that should be a useful tool for determining someone's guilt.

Cameras are more reliable, so it would really depend on circumstance for that.

QuoteIs it expensive to figure out who the perpetrator of those crimes is?

I would assume so, besides mass murderers who are, again, generally above the law.

QuoteAlso, if you think someone has killed someone but you are not 100% sure, you STILL have a massively expensive trial even if the potential punishment is a lengthy custodial sentence, you don't just go "hmm this is a tricky case let's not spend any money on a trial and let him walk free", do you?

But not statistically as expensive as death trials because you have less appeals and trials.

QuoteOf course accusing me of thinking "killing should be cheap" and having messed up priorities is also very constructive... not that I actually even vaguely hinted at that or anything.

You argued that the money could be better spent on helping the needy, therefor you are arguing that the cost of killing a death row inmate should be cheaper. You didn't hint, you outright said it.

QuoteI love how pointing out that the state probably spends far more per murderer than it does per homeless person or other vulnerable person, or victims of violent crimes etc. and that maybe this is an issue that needs addressing...

Again, implying that the cost of death penalties is too high. To me it's not nearly high enough.
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Shiranu

Quote(explanation: country sizes are distorted based on number of executions - skinny countries rarely/never execute, fat countries often execute)

Gee, I sure wish we handled our law more like the Middle East and China (said no civilized country besides the U.S. ever...).
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

SilentFutility

Quote from: "Hydra009"
QuoteAlso, that article compares the costs of the trials. It doesn't seem to compare the costs of life imprisonment to execution directly, and another thing to note is that keeping someone on death row for decades is imprisoning them.
Well, yeah.  But the appeals process is part of the cost of applying the death penalty so naturally, that's going to be included (as is imprisonment during the appeals process).  I suppose you could fudge the numbers by comparing only the cost of the execution to the cost of life imprisonment, but would that paint an accurate picture?

QuoteWhat of the cases that are extremely clear-cut? Those where the perpetrator has admitted guilt? Those who have committed huge mass murders or cut people down in broad daylight in front of dozens of onlookers, on camera?

Is it expensive to figure out who the perpetrator of those crimes is?
And what of them?  What should the procedure be in such cases?  How does one differentiate "clear-cut" cases from cases that aren't so clear cut?
Of course you could include a trial for the death penalty's extra expense over a trial for life imprisonment in the cost of execution.
I'm simply pointing out that comparing only the costs of both trials and then saying that one is overall more expensive than the other is clearly not painting an accurate picture at all. I don't want to fudge the numbers.


I'm not sure, however certain cases certainly spring to mind. I don't have a perfect system that incorporates capital punishment all worked out, I'm trying to argue that it is worth giving some serious thought. Clearly most of the examples of such systems today are pretty badly implemented, but that doesn't mean that the idea should be automatically written-off as a result.

Quote from: "Shiranu"But not statistically as expensive as death trials because you have less appeals and trials.
The trial isn't the entire cost of imprisoning someone, nor is it the entire cost of executing someone.

Quote from: "Shiranu"You argued that the money could be better spent on helping the needy, therefor you are arguing that the cost of killing a death row inmate should be cheaper. You didn't hint, you outright said it.
I pointed out a way in which society is operating which is far from ideal: we are spending vast amounts of money on people who in some cases will never re-integrate into society and will only harm others if given the chance. I then suggested that capital punishment was a posible solution to this. If you have a better solution, or a reason why capital punishment is not a good solution, then I'd like to hear it. Problems don't get solved if everyone ignores them. They also don't get solved if people appeal to emotion rather than actually debating something.

Quote from: "Shiranu"
QuoteI love how pointing out that the state probably spends far more per murderer than it does per homeless person or other vulnerable person, or victims of violent crimes etc. and that maybe this is an issue that needs addressing...

Again, implying that the cost of death penalties is too high. To me it's not nearly high enough.
No, implying that the cost of keeping someone in prison for life with no gain to society whatsoever other than keeping them out of it is too high. That is literally my entire point.

All I've said about the massive costs of the death penalty in the US is that obviously keeping someone in harsh, degrading and inhumane conditions for decades on end while they slowly rot and go insane is neither the right way to go about it nor does it save money nor help society, so it is pointless to do it that way.

I'm willing to consider capital punishment as a solution with an open mind, that's not the same thing as "I want killing to be cheap". I want western societies to curb the VAST amounts they are spending on those who do not deserve it, and spend those savings on those who deserve and need it. This is clearly not ideal, do you have any solutions or better ways of doing things to propose?